Oh splendid here comes another conventional publisher announcing a new free-to-play game, let’s all look forward to pushing some lanes and levelling up some wizar- hang on. Bethesda’s BattleCry isn’t a Dote ‘em up. No, it’s not even a FPS or TBS or RPG or CCG Dote ‘em up hybrid. BattleCry’s a melee-focused third-person multiplayer game, with up to 32 stylish soldiers murdering each other. And they are quite stylish, as the art direction is by Dishonored visual designer Viktor Antonov.

Developed by Bethesda’s own BattleCry Studios, no, it’s definitely not a Dote ‘em up. Sorry, I’m still processing that surprise. What a novelty in this day and age. The website explains:

Responsive, smooth controls unleash violent, high-impact, and stunning combo attacks previously reserved for modern brawlers. Dynamic movement allows you to seamlessly grapple, evade and mantle to quickly cover distances and evade the other team. Engage in combat and use the game’s Adrenaline system to unlock special powers for a short time or conserve Adrenaline to unleash your lethal Ultimate ability when the time is right. In BattleCry, your skill, timing, and teamwork create a diverse gameplay experience.

It’s class-based, with the likes of cybernetic Brawlers, arrow-flinging Archers, and high-tech Gadgeteers. Well, high-tech-ish. Like Dishonored, it goes down in an alternate history sort of setting, one where gunpowder was banned by treaty so everyone now plays around with perfectly harmless zappy energy.

BattleCry will have a touch of persistent progression, with skill trees and perks and all that. Shacknews say the same ‘Iron’ virtual currency used for those also buys cosmetic items, so one imagines monetisation will lie in buying that in bulk.

IGN have played a little and report back that players can salute their enemies and give them a medal at the end of rounds, which all sounds very friendly. Multiplayer-only games, and especially free-to-play ones, are prone to being ruined by toxic communities so it’s nice that BattleCry Studios are thinking about this from the start. Sensible, that.

Here, have a peek at some swords-and-zapguns action in the cinematic announcement trailer:

Yeah, it looks cool. I don’t even mind the PvP only these days. Trailer actually has a pretty accurate vibe of ‘visit the people next door, have a big fight, everyone dies within minutes’. And you can pay the iron price for hats!

That description reminded me inmediately of Rakion. I sounds exactly like it if memory serves. You know, that 3rd person game that came with Gunbound. That game was pretty damn fun and every character while a stereotype looked cool and had a unique spin to them.
I might play this on that comparison alone. Heres hoping its as fun.

So it is a battle arena, you can SALUTE your enemies, it claims to be tactical, yet it is not even remotely involving a ball or other dynamic strategic element of importance that gives the carnage an overlaying element of complexity. How exactly will this be something new compared to Quake 3 Arena / Unreal Tournament?
A missed chance I say!
Instead of Jugger, Hyperblade, Bloodbowl or other complex murder-sports this will be just another team-deathmatch-a-ton with fancy micro transactions.

You have to place your near-oracle level of insights in as early as possible! Otherwise in the bidding contest of “Told ya so!” you are in just too late ,- )

Still my judgement has a high probability of hitting it on the spot… Trailer only shows brutal combat, textblock emphasises visceral combat and rythmic button pushing to achieve glory. This will be closer to the Spartacus TV series than the inception of a new team sports.
But in all seriousness my post contains a certain amount of bitterness and I know it. It is just… melee based group combat, saluting enemy warriors and not “Salute of the Juggers” ? link to youtube.com

In addition to being shockingly bland, the character designs don’t fit the level of violence. They look too harmless to be exploding a persons head into red salsa. At least they don’t look as repulsive as the people in Dishonored.

The game looks interesting, but they lost me with it being third person. Third person pvp melee combat is clumsy and extremely difficult to make skill-based rather than just click spamming. Chivalry is the one game that showed how skill-based melee combat should be done (discounting the balance-destroying bugs the developers refuse to fix of course) and I just can’t see that working well in a third person-only game.

I’m actually kind of excited for this. Maybe because the brawler-types (with those mechanical gauntlets) look like they were pulled straight from the movie adptation of “With Fire and Sword”.
I also appreciate that, apparently, you can play as a lady – and regardless of class at that! But those high heels are pissing me off.

We are having female characters in games, and yet they suffer special treatment. About the trailer:
– We have a 2-6 (without counting the heads) female-male distribution, which is not the best nor the worst, but I am not imagining a 6-2 trailer.
– All the female supporting characters are in dexterity-based classes (Archer, Fencer?).
– The scene involving the leaders has the male as the loser, which is only fair, but unsurprisingly it is for losing one’s head (sorry about that): as gory as they come. A gross scene that acts as a climax not inflicted upon the female? What a surprise.

I guess I am being quite a jerk, but I had to shake it off. I do not like faux-equality.

Not sure that literally wielding a broadsword falls under a “dexterity” kind of class. I very much want games to have more equal representation, but cynicism like this seems misplaced, especially when you seem…mad?…that a woman didn’t get beheaded at the end of this?

Heh, I was kind of expecting someone would point it out. But at the same time I was hoping it wouldn’t be.

I do think that her being the first is minor. What’s the point of her being the first? I don’t think that the order has any importance here, except for the climax which, naturally, goes the last. And still, she was the “cleanest” death.

To make my point clear, I think that Bethesda is not the worst offender (they actually do a fairly good job through their franchises in this regard), both here and through the studio’s history, but it doesn’t mean we should ignore the misdemeanors. Eqaulity is something more than banishing boob armor and so.

I do not want the female character to have been beheaded there. In fact, I could make do without that scene, or the trailer for all it counts. I just point out that we don’t seem ready to see some reversal of roles in the grittiest situations.

You’re right about the weapons of the female I denominated the Fencer, but I also got the impression (maybe because the physical build she was depicted with) that she was supposed to be quick and nimble, not sturdy.